Printable View
Both youth coaches - both met with their respective charges in 1997 semi final - one went on to bring most those talents through to the senior team and was supported by a competent FA that knew how to develop football - the other was stabbed in the back by the FAI.
RESULT - they're at the world cup and one of the best teams to watch in it and we're not
Get real WWS, the FAI were right to sack Kerr, in his tenure the Irish team gave the most limpless insipid array of displays i have ever witnessed as a Fan, He had neither the balls or the tactical Know how to get us to the world cup, The players didn't respect him either, he was out of his depth,, thank christ he was sacked because i couldn't take another heartless performance under Kerr..The match away to Switzerland in Basle 2003 set the trend for his tenure in charge, nothing changed after that!
He definitely had the tactical know how. His results at every other level show this. what he didn't have was good enough players.
Peckerman obviously does
I'm glad someone else mentioned this, it's been confusing me - everything I've read about the Argentina coach says he's a great manager and the TV pundits (including RTE) have praised him highly. Do they not realise this Peckerman guy has NEVER coached in the English Premier League! :eek: And he didn't come close to winning 100 caps as a player (hugely important for international management in the modern era).Quote:
Originally Posted by wws
It's one thing to win tournaments with little kids, anyone could do that because it's much easier than winning matches with grown-ups. Although Kerr proved how rubbish he was in the 1997 championships in Malaysia when his team failed to beat Pekerman's Argentina in the semis despite having future world stars like Aidan Lynch, Thomas Morgan and Dessie Baker in his squad. (The Argentina squad was full of no-mark journeyman like Riquelme, Cambiasso, Pablo Aimar, Lionel Scaloni, Leandro Cufre, Leonard Franco and Walter Samuel who isn't even in the current squad).
Those crazy South Americans!Quote:
“If it was up to me, I’d give Jose Pekerman a contract for life.” These words, uttered by Julio Grondona, president of the Argentine Football Association (AFA), offer a good indication of the esteem in which the national coach is held.
continuity is a great thing
the contrast in the way things are done is significant
world football keeps moving on and we go and hire the walsall coach
the implications of the poverty of the "english game" mentality are there for all to see this world cup
the gas part is we outplayed pekerman with cambiasso et all for large parts of 97 - now we've regressed more put em under pressure Mick byrne ballacks
we'll never progress with that mindset
Lads this would be a point if Kerr was never given the Irish job. But he was given the job and we finished out of the top 2 twice the first time we did that since Eoin Hand. Kerr said judge me on my results and he was which is fair enough. I was a supporter of Kerrs right up to the end but I want the Irish manager to be judged on his results over 2 campaigns.
its really down to the football culture you aspire to
we've gone for short sighted adulation of the failed football across the water
we needed a coach to ingrain a new brand of professional thinking and attitude - if that tooke two or three failed campaigns it would be worth it (mindful of the fact that pretty much everyone agrees we're deficient in squad terms of world class players to work with for the last few years)
anyone who has watched the great football of teams in this world cup knows that deep down we're not even aspiring to that level with our actions to date
Where were the signs that this was happening under Kerr. Long term planning is the way ahead I agree. But does it have to come at the expense of short term qualification. I think not. Also it is not the job of the Manager of the national team to in charge of long term strategic planning. That should be done in the background, out of the spotlight and pressures of qualification and the media and all that entails. Your ideas are good but I would disagree with the practcalities about how you go about it.
I think Kerr would be brilliant in the job you talk about but I dont think that job is for the Irish football manager. They should work in conjunction. It is like Frank Arnesen and Jose Mourinhio at Chelsea.
wws I was like you delighted when kerr managed to get the Ireland job and defended him from Premiership worshipping supporters who were demanding that some clown like Peter Reid get the job.
But Kerrs reign was nothing short of a disaster. His tactics belonged back in the Italia 90 era. The football was atrocious and the displays in Cyprus/Basle were among the worst I ever seen from an Irish side and I just about seen the latter parts of Eoin Hands regime. Most of the players also seem to have disliked the regime.
His competitive record in charge was woeful only beating Faroes,Cyprus,Georgia,Albania and his use of friendlies was a joke, treating them as seriously as competitive matches and not experimenting or trying out youngsters.
Although I agree that harking back to the days of Mick Byrne isn`t exactly a step forward ultimately Kerr had to go.
Great post Joe and I also would like to add that the appointment of Mick Byrne is not half as significant as people are making out. He is a cheerleader there to boost the spirits of the squad no more no less. It does not mean that all of a sudden the players will not prepare properly etc. There is more to football than just preparation. There are tactics, motivation fitness and many other aspects. You need to get all right rather than just a select one or two.
Stan made the point that the whole camp was lacking in strong personalities & strong characters. If bringing back Mick Byrne goes some way to fix the problem then 100% fine by me. It's hardly indicative of resorting to outdated football methods.Quote:
Originally Posted by stickyjoe
Look, there are so many things we can complain about in the way the FAI goes about his business. Any manager, domestically nurtured or nurtured in the UK or wherever will face the same problems. But as themanager of the team the results were poor, the attitude was wrong, he lost the dressing room, the use of friendlies was wrong, the use of personnel (in my amteur opinion) was wrong and so on. It clearly was just not working.
Take the following most recent competitive games in sequence: Israel away, Israel at home, Faroes away, France at home, Cyprus away, Switzerland at home. Which of these showed signs that Kerr was up to the task? If my results at work fell this far short of my targets I'd be long gone out of here.
I'd personally love to see someone like Kerr take overall charge of the FAI but that's a different story.
Pekermans 2006 argentina are playing the same way that Pekermans 1997 Argentina team played - the continuity of doing it right is the central point - their is no short termism. Its this central fact that we in Ireland arent grasping - fck respect of the players/judge me on reults or any baloney we are simply not serious about changing the football we aspire to playing - and we will NEVER do well if we dont aspire to being like the best and doing it right
hint - we're currently doing it wrong
I've no problem with the english prem - its a great league but our footballing horizons are extremely limited by it - its not the be all and end all and english football has a lot of limitations
we shoul learn from the best at this world cup because plainly we wernt paying attention in 1997 - absolute disgrace that half their team went on to be at the 2006 WC and half our ended up the LoI - it says it all to me
Somebody posted a few months ago the Argentinian squad that beat us the the World Youth Cup semi-finals. Most of that squad are household names now. Only a handful of the Irish squad are doing anything of note, if I recall correctly.
Didn't we beat Ghana in the 3rd place play off, or were Ghana in the final? I've only a hazy memory at this stage. But if I'm right, how many of those Ghanaians are in the WC06 squad?
But the Senior team under Kerr did not play the same way as the underage teams did. When did we ever see the 4 3 3 . So the continuity argument goes out the window. The reason that Perkerman has been kept in the job at underage because he was achieving success with good football. He was then given the senior managers job, just like Kerr. The difference is that Pekerman has continued to play the same way he did as an underage coach and has put faith in his young players at the expense of the older player. Kerr did not do this, given fewer debuts than any manager in recent memory.
You are not comparing like with like here. Kerr played negative boring football , this was not the best and this was nothing to do with not aspiring to be the best etc. His tactics were seriously flawed at the highest level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
as i edited my post above thats to our footballs shame
same player in blue n white in 1997 would have been developed
we've small minds in this country and we cant grasp the potential we have if we do it right
anyway back to the walsall assistant manager and "team spirit" :rolleyes:
While Kerr failed in his time as Ireland manager I don't understand why people blame his tactics. His tactics in Israel were absolutely spot on. They are a team that plays on the break. They let you attack them and catch you on the hop when you lose possession. The best thing to do in that case is don't give them possession. You seen that with Roy Keane. He was free in space and could have crossed the ball in but decided just to pass it back to midfield. It was very unlucky that we lost a goal in the last minute but if we'd have won that game we would have been the first team to win in Israel in a decade and a half and Kerr would have been praised.
The other games that we lost leads was nothing more than losing the nerve. Whether that was down to Kerr's lack of motivational skills I don't know but you don't tell a team to go and attack the French in Paris but just sit back on a point in Basle. I couldn't fault his tactics but I know for a fact that he could have certainly done with Martin O'Neill type speaches at half time.
Kerr didn't play boring football. He played very attractive football as we seen in the friendlies and in Paris. You don't play attractive football in friendlies and change your tactics for the important games. It's not his fault that Irish players lose their nerve when their favourites to win outside of Lansdowne.
Absolutely agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD
When Kerr went the Tribune ran the headline "End of an Era: the McCarthy Era" and it was 100% correct.
I do not take pleasure in been critical of Kerr however I cant let my prejudice deceive my eyes.
Did Israel play all their home games in Israel in that period?Quote:
Originally Posted by eirebhoy
Sure, Kerr could have had more luck and who knows, better results may have led to better morale, and better susbsequent performances and so on.
Bad luck:
Nothing at all went our way at home to Israel. That game was an absolute freak
Bad offside calls in Basle
Speculative equaliser in Tel Aviv
Switzerland's late winner against Cyprus
Timing of French players returning to the scene
Injuries & suspensions at key times
O'shea's shot in Paris
Barthez not getting sent off
Getting Markus Merk for the Swiss match
But we had good luck too:
Getting ANYTHING from the game in Cyprus
Faroes not going 1 up from a corner at 0-0
Shay Given rescuing us in Basle
Half the French team getting injured or suspended for Paris
Almost every other result in the group suiting us
But, as you know & we'll agree to differ, I do believe that tactics & substitutions, especially in the two Israel games were a big factor.
I consistently felt we should judge Kerr on the whole campaign. By the time we got to the last 2 games Kerr had a few too many entries in the debit column, but he could have scored ponts in the credit column to even things up. He didn't. The last two games were the stuff of nightmares.
Who should Kerr have played that he didn't play? I think that's ridiculous.
He has little choice but to stick with McCarthy's tried and trusted during the Euro qualifiers but after that there were major changes. The difference between the team that lost in McCarthy's game in charge and the team that played the first WC qualifier against Cyprus is huge. The only players to occupy the same position in both teams were Given, Cunningham and Keane.
O'Shea replaced Harte
Carr replaced Kelly
O'Brien replaced Breen
Kilbane replaced Kinsella (Kilbane got player of the year for his performances in the centre so it turned out to be a good move)
Kavanagh replaced Holland
A.Reid replaced Healy
Duff replaced Kilbane (on the left)
Morrison replaced Duff (up front)
He gave debuts to over 15 players, most of which just weren't/aren't good enough.
No but I think the unbeaten run stretched to 20-30 games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88